Polymerization Behavior and Mechanical Properties of High-Viscosity Bulk Fill and Low Shrinkage Resin Composites
Polymerization Behavior and Mechanical Properties of High-Viscosity Bulk Fill and Low Shrinkage Resin Composites
复制标题
DOI：
10.2341/16-385-l
复制
发表时间：
2017-11-01
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
Miyazaki, M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Shibasaki, S.;Takamizawa, T.;Miyazaki, M.
本研究测定了不同种类树脂复合材料的力学性能和体积聚合收缩。对三种高粘度填充树脂复合材料进行了测试：Teter EvoCeram Bulk Fill(TB，Ivoclar Vivadent)、Filtek Bulk Fill After Restaurant(FB，3M ESPE)和Sonic Fill(SF，Kerr Corp)。使用两种低收缩树脂复合材料：Kalore(KL，GC Corp)和Filtek LS After(LS，3M ESPE)。以Herculite Ultra(HU，Kerr Corp)、Estite sigma Quick(EQ，Tokuyama Dental)和Filtek Supreme Ultra(SU，3M ESPE)三种传统树脂复合材料作为对照材料。根据ISO规范4049，每个树脂复合材料使用六个试件来确定弯曲强度、弹性模数和回弹能力。用充水膨胀仪测定了聚合反应的体积收缩。数据采用方差分析和Tukey‘s诚实显着性差异检验(a=0.05)。该树脂复合材料的弯曲强度为115.4~148.1 MPa，弹性模量为5.6~13.4 Gpa，回弹为0.70~1.0MJ/m(3)。材料之间的弯曲性能有显著差异，但没有明显的异常值。在180秒的持续时间内作为时间函数的体积变化取决于树脂复合材料的类型。然而，除LS外，所有树脂复合材料的体积收缩在光照开始后不久就开始了，并且在光照过程中体积迅速下降，然后下降较慢。在180秒的测量点上，低收缩树脂复合材料KL和LS的体积收缩显著低于其他受试材料。相反，三种填充树脂复合材料的体积变化率高于其他树脂复合材料。这项研究的结果为临床医生提供了关于当前这些类别的树脂复合材料的机械性能和聚合动力学的有价值的信息。
The present study determined the mechanical properties and volumetric polymerization shrinkage of different categories of resin composite. Three high viscosity bulk fill resin composites were tested: Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TB, Ivoclar Vivadent), Filtek Bulk Fill posterior restorative (FB, 3M ESPE), and Sonic Fill (SF, Kerr Corp). Two low-shrinkage resin composites, Kalore (KL, GC Corp) and Filtek LS Posterior (LS, 3M ESPE), were used. Three conventional resin composites, Herculite Ultra (HU, Kerr Corp), Estelite sigma Quick (EQ, Tokuyama Dental), and Filtek Supreme Ultra (SU, 3M ESPE), were used as comparison materials. Following ISO Specification 4049, six specimens for each resin composite were used to determine flexural strength, elastic modulus, and resilience. Volumetric polymerization shrinkage was determined using a water-filled dilatometer. Data were evaluated using analysis of variance followed by Tukey's honestly significant difference test (a=0.05). The flexural strength of the resin composites ranged from 115.4 to 148.1 MPa, the elastic modulus ranged from 5.6 to 13.4 GPa, and the resilience ranged from 0.70 to 1.0 MJ/m(3). There were significant differences in flexural properties between the materials but no clear outliers. Volumetric changes as a function of time over a duration of 180 seconds depended on the type of resin composite. However, for all the resin composites, apart from LS, volumetric shrinkage began soon after the start of light irradiation, and a rapid decrease in volume during light irradiation followed by a slower decrease was observed. The low shrinkage resin composites KL and LS showed significantly lower volumetric shrinkage than the other tested materials at the measuring point of 180 seconds. In contrast, the three bulk fill resin composites showed higher volumetric change than the other resin composites. The findings from this study provide clinicians with valuable information regarding the mechanical properties and polymerization kinetics of these categories of current resin composite.